9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obviously mean proper steps in accordance with law. The fact that the Revenue had not taken the steps in accordance with law cannot possibly be construed as a factor in favour of the Revenue for extending the limitation as stipulated under Section 149 of the Act. Plainly, there was no court order impeding the Revenue from issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act, in accordance with law.
We reject the contention that the period of limitation as stipulated u/s 49 (1) of the Act stood extended by virtue of the proceedings initiated by the orders passed in TWYLIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, ARUN GARG, R.P. BASIA & CO, SUSHMA GOEL, ADA NEWS IN SHORTS PVT LTD, ABHINAV JINDAL, MANGLA [2024 (1) TMI 759 - DELHI HIGH COURT]
Thus, the present petition is allowed and reassessment order and notices quashed - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for the year 2012-2013 if the escaped assessment amounted to Rupees fifty lakhs or more. The proviso limits the retrospective operation of Section 149 (1) (b) to protect the interests of the assesses." 5. In the present case the notice under Section 148 of the Act could have been issued for a maximum period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The said period had expired on 31.03.2023. Notwithstanding the same, Mr. Rai, the learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the impugned notices and order should be considered within the specified time as in the earlier round this court had stayed the proceedings. He submits that the benefit of the stay granted by the court in Abhinav Jindal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 52(1) Delhi, W.P.(C) 1006/2023 is required to be construed in favor of the Revenue. According to him, the time period during which the said petition was pending before this court is required to be excluded for the purposes of computing limitation. 6. We find no merit in the aforesaid contention. The AO, prior to issuing the impugned notice, had issued a notice dated 22.06.2021 under Section 148 of the Act. The said notice was faul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a return of his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant assessment year, in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed; and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a return required to be furnished under section139 : Provided that in a case-- (a) where a return has been furnished during the period commencing on the 1st day of October, 1991 and ending on the 30th day of September, 2005 in response to a notice served under this section, and (b) subsequently a notice has been served under sub-section (2) of section 143 after the expiry of twelve months specified in the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 143, as it stood immediately before the amendment of said subsection by the Finance Act, 2002 (20 of 2002) but before the expiry of the time limit for making the assessment, re-assessment or recomputation as specified in sub-section (2) of section 153, every such notice referred to in this clause shall be deemed to be a valid notice: Provid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer about fitness of a case for the issue of notice under section 148, need not issue such notice himself." Post Finance Act 2021 "148. Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, and subject to the provisions of section 148A, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice, along with a copy of the order passed, if required, under clause (d) of section 148A, requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in such notice, a return of his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant assessment year, in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed; and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a return required to be furnished under section 139: Provided that no notice under this section shall be issued unless there is information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so be noted that in Ganesh Dass Khanna, we had recorded the stand of the revenue that the issue concerning limitation and the specified authority are "intertwined". For convenience, the relevant part of the judgement is extracted hereafter: "24. On behalf of the revenue, the following broad submissions were made:… …(viii) Both under the unamended 1961 Act and amended 1961 Act, the issue concerning limitation is inextricably intertwined with two aspects: (a) First, the rank of the authority granting approval/sanction for triggering reassessment proceedings. (b) Second, the quantum of income which has escaped assessment." [Emphasis is ours] 12. Clearly, the revenue advanced the argument of interlinkage between limitation and the ascertainment of the specified authority due to the plain language of the amended Section 151 of the Act. Section 151, when read alongside the first proviso to Section 148, brings the aspect of inextricable linkage to the fore. 12.1. Clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 151 of the amended Act (which has been extracted hereinabove) clearly specify the authority whose approval can trigger the reassessment proceedings. Thus, if three (3) y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er." [emphasis added] 9. In Twylight Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 25(3) Delhi & Ors. (supra) this court allowed the petition filed by the petitioner being W.P.(C) No. 1006/2023 on 05.01.2024 and set aside the notice dated 26.07.2022. 10. It is apparent from the above that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act in the earlier round was set aside on the ground that the AO had not followed the mandatory requirement of seeking an approval from the competent authority. 11. Clearly, the fact that the petitioner had succeeded in its challenge to the said notice cannot be a ground for exclusion of the period spent by the assessee in pursuing the said litigation. The time spent by the petitioner in pursuing the challenge can neither be excluded nor can be claimed as resulting in extension of the period of limitation. 12. The Revenue is required to take all necessary steps for initiation of the assessment proceedings within the period of limitation. This would obviously mean proper steps in accordance with law. The fact that the Revenue had not taken the steps in accordance with law cannot possibly be construed as a factor in favour of the Revenue for exte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
